Urban Outfitters is hardly new to starting controversy and this past weekend one of their products raised serious eyebrows once again. The retailer was selling a vintage Kent State sweatshirt that appeared to have had blood splatter on the front of it; a stark reminder of the 1970 shooting on campus that left four dead. When first posted online the shirt was specified as a one-off item with a steep $129 price tag. Once people caught on and Urban Outfitters found itself under fire for its morbid product they yanked it from their website and all employees received a lengthy email regarding the item.
The CEO of Urban Outfitters, Dick Hayne, explained the whole situation to workers in part by saying,
"We purchased it from the Rose Bowl Flea Market in an assorted lot of 50 other sweatshirts from other colleges and universities across the country," he said. "All were well worn and many were 'distressed'. We photographed them as purchased, including the Kent State sweatshirt, and posted for sale on our website as part of our sun-faded vintage collection.
The condition of the Kent State sweatshirt pictured is as we bought it," he continued. "There is no blood on it, and we certainly never promoted it as such. The discoloration that some mistook for blood is from natural fading and bleaching. Once the negative feedback was brought to our attention, we removed the item immediately from sale and sent an apology letter to Kent State University."
Are you buying Hanye's explanation or do you think he's enjoying the negative press? Do you think that Urban Outfitters were hoping that consumers would think that this vintage piece was on site during the Kent state shootings? Was this situation really innocent or did the retailer kind of welcome even the bad press that insisted their antics were in really poor taste?
